"All aboard our new line to Windermere" - Northern

[Class 170101]

I'll be the judge of that, thanks...

... and it has every chance of happening. GRIP 2 started a few months ago.

Seems very slow for a branch line? Surely a Paisley Canal style wiring would suffice here?

I don't think the 5 over Burneside Lower AOCL crossing will "go" anytime soon.

Why? Surely make it a proper barriered level Crossing MCB OD or close it.

 

[randyrippley]

A loop part way along would be better, otherwise one train would be trapped at Windermere for at least as long as it took the other one to run the length of the branch, unless the line was equipped with enough signals for two trains to run close together in the same direction. Given your name, can you update my hazy recollection that the bed of the second track at Kendal is still free?

The bed of the second track is still there, but I don't think there is room for a platform due to the adjacent steep bank next to Lakeland Plastics.
To put a second platform in you'd have to rip up and move the existing platform and waiting room northwards by around 5-8 metres into the car park, and then skew the track northwards. That may affect the bus turning area.
A better cheaper idea may be to extend the length of the existing platform into A and B sections, allowing two standing trains end-on with a runaround on the existing unused trackbed. That would have the advantage of allowing steam excursions. The Windermere line is a perfect line for running a regular timetabled steam service on, using something like a BR standard tank engine hauling 3-5 coaches

 

[BigCj34]

Given the route is 20 minutes, and presumably a 40 minute round trip, what's the need to have any passing loops? Also these times will surely reduce once electrified.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Can't they use spare masts from Carlisle Kingmoor yard and get the job done cheaply?

Oh, sorry, stuck in the early 80's again.

Just think, if BR had got on with the job then, we could this year be celebrating the 30th anniversary of the introduction of shiny new electric trains to the branch, and looking forward to a second generation of shiny new EMU's operating the service!

Something genuinely worth shouting about.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Given the route is 20 minutes, and presumably a 40 minute round trip, what's the need to have any passing loops? Also these times will surely reduce once electrified.

So that a second train can operate on the branch i.e. a better than hourly regular service, or for less frequent long distance services or for occasional excursions to visit this obscure tourist destination. For example a daily direct service from London on the current WCML, or in future direct from Heathrow Airport, along HS2.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Given the route is 20 minutes, and presumably a 40 minute round trip, what's the need to have any passing loops? Also these times will surely reduce once electrified.

Clearly if you keep the current hourly service, there's no need for passing loops. But quite a few people here (myself included) think hourly is not adequate and not attractive enough for a line which is not only a commuter link but also the only rail link into one of the UK's leading tourist areas, and half hourly - at least during the summer months - ought to be the aim.

If you want to get a half-hourly service without any passing loops, you'd need to reduce the one-way journey + turnaround time to 15 minutes. Let's say you allow 3 minutes for turnaround time at Windermere and Oxenholme. That gives you 12 minutes get from Oxenholme to Windermere, calling at 3 stations en route. I've no doubt electrification will shave a minute or two from the journey, and maybe sorting out the level crossing at Burneside would get you another minute, but - reducing the journey from 20 minutes to 12 minutes? Good luck!

(Also, even 3 minutes isn't really adequate for turnaround time - it gives you no scope to recover from delays, so is likely to lead to a fairly unreliable timetable).

 

[83G/84D]

It isn't recently opened, it's not new, it's not shiny and Windermere is somewhat less than wonderful for probably 10 months of the year nowadays.

The brand new service takes it back to the 1980's when the branch operated in isolation of the rest of the network.

And what is the quality of vehicles offered for this shiny.... etc

I went to the lakes for the first time earlier this year, my thoughts in particular about Bowness-in-Windermere (down by the lakeside) were not good.

I didn't like the amount of commercialisation. There were too many shops selling "tat", it was overcrowded and expensive to park, and I just did not like it.

Windermere itself (where the Railway station is located) and Ambleside are better imo.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

I went to the lakes for the first time earlier this year, my thoughts in particular about Bowness-in-Windermere (down by the lakeside) were not good.

I didn't like the amount of commercialisation. There were too many shops selling "tat", it was overcrowded and expensive to park, and I just did not like it.

Windermere itself (where the Railway station is located) and Ambleside are better imo.

The area of the lake is the accepted tourist area, so you should not be surprised about the amount of commercialised entities in its environs. Many people go with the specific intention of riding on the ferries. On the opposite shoreline, you also have the Lakeside and Haverthwaite heritage railway as an attraction.

Ambleside is a more attractive place to visit than the Windermere area in the vicinity of the railway station.

 

[83G/84D]

The area of the lake is the accepted tourist area, so you should not be surprised about the amount of commercialised entities in its environs. Many people go with the specific intention of riding on the ferries. On the opposite shoreline, you also have the Lakeside and Haverthwaite heritage railway as an attraction.

Ambleside is a more attractive place to visit than the Windermere area in the vicinity of the railway station.

The area is also part of a National Park, I feel that Windermere is overdone in terms of commercialism. I realise it has to attract visitors and make money from them etcetera but it is too much.

 

[QueensCurve]

Sure I've read somewhere the electrification plans include passive provision for a dynamic loop, but nothing has been confirmed as far as I know.

A long standing criticism of the track layout of the branch (single track siding) is the lack of provision of locomotive run-round facilities at Windermere. This precludes operation of locomotive hauled excursions.

The present layout of the branch predates the later shortening at the station for the supermarket on the former station site having taken place at the time of electrification/resignalling of the main line through Oxenholme. .
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Why? Surely make it a proper barriered level Crossing MCB OD or close it.

This seems like a distant hope rather than in imminent reality.

 

[edwin_m]

A long standing criticism of the track layout of the branch (single track siding) is the lack of provision of locomotive run-round facilities at Windermere. This precludes operation of locomotive hauled excursions.

However, in practice the hourly branch train takes up all the capacity so it isn't possible for excursions to run, except at less busy times or Borders-style by cancelling several service trains. So the lack of a loop at Windermere only really becomes an issue if a loop is provided elsewhere to allow two trains on the branch at a time.

 

[Howardh]

I went to the lakes for the first time earlier this year, my thoughts in particular about Bowness-in-Windermere (down by the lakeside) were not good.

I didn't like the amount of commercialisation. There were too many shops selling "tat", it was overcrowded and expensive to park, and I just did not like it.

Windermere itself (where the Railway station is located) and Ambleside are better imo.

That part is where most tourists head to, and it's IMO the most unattractive part of the Lakes. For me, the Lakes (via train) starts after Ambleside - but even so taking the 516 to Dungeon Ghyll still has the feeling of a tourist honeypot with a nice view rather than being in the Lakes.

Therefore, it's the other side that's better! Harder to get to, much less populated, far fewer tat, spectacular scenery and decent beer!

 

[RichmondCommu]

That part is where most tourists head to, and it's IMO the most unattractive part of the Lakes. For me, the Lakes (via train) starts after Ambleside - but even so taking the 516 to Dungeon Ghyll still has the feeling of a tourist honeypot with a nice view rather than being in the Lakes.

However the walks from Langdale are fantastic Either stay at Elterwater YHA or camp at the National Trust campsite close to Dungeon Ghyll. Happy days

 

[83G/84D]

Further west the A595 road trip north of Barrow-in-Furness towards Millom and beyond to Ravenglass is a pleasant journey. I quite liked Kendal and Keswick as well.

 

[Whistler40145]

If passing loops are installed to provide an increased service, would a more advanced signalling system be required?

 

[DynamicSpirit]

Most definitely. I'm not absolutely certain, but I would hazard a guess that - since the line currently amounts to one 10-mile-long siding - there would currently be no signalling on it beyond Oxenholme Station. So you wouldn't merely be talking about a more advanced signalling - but installing something from scratch.

Would make a passing loop quite an expensive proposition, although personally I'd still very much like to see one added.

 

[Joseph_Locke]

Most definitely. I'm not absolutely certain, but I would hazard a guess that - since the line currently amounts to one 10-mile-long siding - there would currently be no signalling on it beyond Oxenholme Station. So you wouldn't merely be talking about a more advanced signalling - but installing something from scratch.

Would make a passing loop quite an expensive proposition, although personally I'd still very much like to see one added.

The Windermere branch is operated by token from a machine at Oxenholme, in turn supervised by Carlisle PSB. The branch would require at least four extra signals and two worked point ends to support an intermediate passing point, so an interlocking of some description would also be needed. There are two issues; really it should go straight onto a ROC workstation, but Carlisle won't go to the ROC this side of 2027. The other issue is that without a loop there is nothing for ARS to work with, so how would a loop-less branch fit into a ROC anyway?

The need for a continuous signalling "presence" could also be triggered by changes to the protection systems at any of the seven assorted level- and footpath crossings.

 

[edwin_m]

In that respect an intermediate loop in the Kendal area would be easier than a second platform at Windermere. In the former case the rest of the branch would remain single line so new cabling would only have to go as far as the distant signal beyond the loop.

 

[QueensCurve]

However, in practice the hourly branch train takes up all the capacity so it isn't possible for excursions to run, except at less busy times or Borders-style by cancelling several service trains. So the lack of a loop at Windermere only really becomes an issue if a loop is provided elsewhere to allow two trains on the branch at a time.

If you had locomotive runround facilities at Windermere it might conceivably be possible to accommodate an excursion with the regular service.

This, or a loop, would potentially undermine the case for electrification which is based in part on the low cost and simplicity of the wiring based on a single track siding.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

Have arriva Northern ever gone to Windermere? If the answer is no then yes they have got a shiny new line to Windermere.

If you answer yes then you are telling porkys.

So is it now possible to get to Windermere entirely on Arriva Northern trains if travelling from elsewhere on the Northern network (eg Sheffield, Leeds or Manchester for example?)

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's a new service not a new line. It's also not "shiny".

 

[Harpers Tate]

So is it now possible to get to Windermere entirely on Arriva Northern trains if travelling from elsewhere on the Northern network (eg Sheffield, Leeds or Manchester for example?)

It is - but opportunities are limited and vary with day of the week. You need to use a Northern train to/from Windermere that has extended beyond Oxenholme, at least as far as Preston and these aren't frequent. So, for example, you can do it from Leeds via Preston using the Leeds <> Blackpool service onto a Preston <> Windermere service. Or the odd direct Manchester Airport <> Windermere service. etc.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Why? Surely make it a proper barriered level Crossing MCB OD or close it.

Is it the case that this particular level crossing is the only means of accessing the areas in the inner hinterland or are there other access roads that could be used?

 

[northwichcat]

Well lines in use are usually shiner than disused lines!

 

[edwin_m]

If you had locomotive runround facilities at Windermere it might conceivably be possible to accommodate an excursion with the regular service.

Not unless the signalling allowed a train to start out from one end while the previous one (in the same direction) was still on its way down the branch, involving probably about six extra signals in each direction. Even then the excursion would have to shunt into the run-round loop (or preferably the loop would have a platform) to be out of the way of the next service train.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

If you had locomotive runround facilities at Windermere it might conceivably be possible to accommodate an excursion with the regular service.

How realistic is that? Rather conveniently, Google maps shows Windermere station with a train in it - from which it's fairly easy to see that the current platform can accommodate about 6 carriages. Stop the train further back to allow room for a locomotive to runaround, and I'm guessing that drops to about 4 carriages. I wonder whether a special excursion that short could be financially viable. And if it meant also stopping the regular trains further back so they are clear of the runaround facilities and points, that also becomes less convenient for the vast majority of passengers.

Of course you could build a longer platform, but then you hit the problem that the line curves slightly as it leaves the station, so you'd end up with a curved platform, and all the safety issues that entails. If you wanted two platforms, then I think from looking at Google maps (not certain here) that would also require taking the land at the far end of the station from peoples' gardens. That all seems hard to justify for a platform whose sole raison d'etre appears to be to allow for occasional excursions.

That all makes me think that people who want to see an improvement to the line would be better off focusing on campaigning for a loop somewhere near Kendal.

 

[aylesbury]

Cant see any new signalling on this branch as one train seems to suffice are there going to be through trains when new timetable starts?

 

[Kendalian]

Here's a view looking out of the station back towards Oxenholme.

http://www.summiteer.co.uk/2013/Jun13/OxWind/P1000270.jpg

Can't say I've measured it, but I reckon there is sufficient room for a second similar length platform.

This was my local line, before I migrated south for a warmer, dryer climate (well Leyland actually ) and I will always support its development (not to mention bending Sir Tim Farron's ear a couple of times!). That said, don't really see the need for a run-round loop, given that most excursions nowadays run top and tailed, even where run-round facilities exist.

Dynamic loop between Burneside and Plantation Bridge (towards Staveley) would be top notch.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is a dynamic loop really needed on a line where most trains stop at all stations? Indeed, I can't see an argument, if the line started being run with two units, why not to simplify to all trains all stations. In that case, it'd be cheaper and just as effective to add a regular short loop at a station.

 

[Bevan Price]

Any justification for electrification presumably assumes a fair few services being extended beyond Oxenholme. The current trend seems to be in the opposite direction.

Also, and at risk of upsetting BeLeavers - who think that Brexit will mean loads more money to spend on everything - I suspect a lot of electrification is likely to be shelved. Perhaps the Autumn Financial Statement will be a vehicle for this.

I don't think they will cancel any electrification schemes - but I won't be surprised if they allow some to be "delayed" for a few years.

 

[Greybeard33]

It's a new service not a new line. It's also not "shiny".

And it's not a new service - not even new to Northern now they have been operating it for 5 months already.

The email I quoted in the OP was one of a regular sequence of marketing emails Northern sends to registered users of the "My Northern" website (this dates back to the Serco-Abellio franchise - Arriva just took it over seamlessly). These emails appear roughly weekly, and are normally unexceptional, promoting leisure travel to various destinations/future events within the Northern area, and/or various ticketing products/offers. So it would not have been surprising if there had been an email about the "new" Northern service to Windermere back in April, but in September it stuck out like a sore thumb!